Ghazal 58, Verse 6

{58,6}

1a) when did I ever collect the equipment for an attack/onslaught
of tears,
2a) that the doors and walls didn't fall at my feet? [they did so every
time!]

1b) when did I ever collect the equipment for an attack/onslaught of tears!
[I never did!]--
2b) for didn't the doors and walls fall at my feet? [and prevent me?]
2c) [thinking] that 'May they not fall at my feet, doors and walls!'

In the framework of a negative question [istifhaam-e
inkaarii] he says, when did I do that?-- that never happened! That is,
[it never happened] that I collected equipment for weeping, and doors and
walls didn't fall at my feet. (54)

He says, whenever I have wanted to weep my heart out, then
at once the doors and walls have fallen at my feet. The meaning of the verse
is that there is so much effect in my weeping that before my intention is
completely accomplished, its effect becomes apparent. (100-01)

The meaning is that if I had not seen doors and walls falling
at my feet (that is, collapsing), then I would have wept my heart out, and
the house which appears to be in this ruined state (that is, with the walls
collapsed and the door fallen in) would already have been torn apart long
ago and not even a trace of it would have remained.... In another place he
has said, {27,7}. (128)

This verse, with its radically inshaa))iyah
structure, permits two negative-question readings. In the first reading, the
framework is 'When did I ever do X, that Y didn't happen!'-- that is, that
every time I did X, then Y happened. In the second reading, the framework
is, 'When did I ever do X? Didn't Y always happen, to prevent me?' So either
I did X many times (always with Y as one result), or I never did X at all
(since I was deterred by Y). The key to these two readings is the versatility
of the omnicompetent little clause-introducing conjunction kih
.

The X is, of course, collecting the 'equipment' for an 'attack,
onslaught' of tears; in other words, preparing to create a devastating personal
flood, as in {58,2}. The Y is, my doors and walls'
falling at my feet. Just as in English, falling at someone's feet [kisii
ke paa;Nv par pa;Rnaa] can suggest, most probably, deliberate collapse
as a gesture of humility and supplication; or, alternatively, simple collapse
(reason unspecified; the collapse just happened to take place near the feet).

In this case, the first sense would provide the image of
the doors and walls begging the lover not to weep such a flood that they would
be destroyed; the second sense would suggest that the lover's mere preparations
for a flood of tears were so potent that the doors and walls were knocked
down even before the actual flood hit them. (As in {5,4},
where even a passing 'thought' of wildness or madness burns the desert to
ashes.)

Nobody will be surprised to realize, knowing Ghalib, that
both senses of 'falling at my feet' work for both readings of the
verse, given above in the translation. We are left nicely and undecidably
balanced among several sets of possibilities. One set: If my tears destroyed
my doors and walls, they did so either physically (my preparations led directly
to actual tears) or by suggestion (the mere preparations caused my house to
collapse). And this destruction happened either repeatedly, as in reading
(a), or never, as in reading (b). Another set: If my tears didn't destroy
my doors and walls, it was because I heeded the humble supplication of the
fearful doors and walls themselves; and this supplication happened either
repeatedly, as in reading (a), or never, as in reading (b). Moreover, if kih introduces a quotation as it so often does, then we have (2c).